Pine Weevil Population Density and Damage to Coniferous Seedlings in a Regeneration Area With and Without Shelterwood

Nordlander, Göran; Bylund, Helena; Örlander, Göran; Wallertz, Kristina

doi:10.1080/02827580310001634

Cited by 44 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was found by Nordlander et al (2003b) that pine weevil feeding on seedlings declined towards the forest edge on both the sun-exposed and shaded side of a clear-cutting, and these authors concluded that there was no evidence for a consistent relationship between global radiation and feeding on the seedlings. Neither was any correlation found in another study in which weekly radiation data and damage in regeneration areas with and without shelterwood were examined (Nordlander et al, 2003a). Based on our findings and previous studies we conclude that reductions in global radiation per se do not explain the increased feeding on seedlings surrounded by vegetation.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

“…If shading increases pine weevil damage one would expect planting under shelter trees to result in more damage, but several experiments have shown the opposite (von Sydow and Ö rlander, 1994;Petersson et al, 2004;Nordlander et al, 2003a). It was found by Nordlander et al (2003b) that pine weevil feeding on seedlings declined towards the forest edge on both the sun-exposed and shaded side of a clear-cutting, and these authors concluded that there was no evidence for a consistent relationship between global radiation and feeding on the seedlings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…In several European countries, damage by the pine weevil is commonly counteracted by treating the seedlings with insecticides (Leather et al, 1999;Långström and Day, 2004). Damage can also be reduced by using different silvicultural methods like a fallow period, scarification, planting under shelter trees or using feeding barriers to protect the seedlings (Långström, 1982;Leather et al, 1999;von Sydow, 1997;Ö rlander and Nilsson, 1999;Nordlander et al, 2000Nordlander et al, , 2003aPetersson et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Why vegetation increases pine weevil damage: Bridge or shelter?

Petersson

Nordlander

Örlander

2006

Forest Ecology and Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Why vegetation increases pine weevil damage: Bridge or shelter?

Petersson

Nordlander

Örlander

2006

Forest Ecology and Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…On the other hand even-aged stands can represent a large, stable and predictable food resource that can benefit food density-dependant pests (e.g. Hylobius abietis, Lof et al, 2005;Nordlander et al, 2003;Pitkanen et al, 2005) and pathogens (e.g. Heterobasidion annosum, Korhonen et al, 1998).…”

Section: Regeneration Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influences of forest stand management on biotic and abiotic risks of damage

Jactel

Nicoll

Branco³

et al. 2009

Ann. For. Sci.

232

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract• This article synthesizes and reviews the available information on the effects of forestry practices on the occurrence of biotic and abiotic hazards, as well as on stand susceptibility to these damaging agents, concentrating on mammal herbivores, pest insects, pathogenic fungi, wind and fire.• The management operations examined are site selection, site preparation, stand composition, regeneration method, cleaning and weed control, thinning and pruning, and harvesting. For each of these operations we have examined how they influence the occurrence of biotic and abiotic damaging agents, the susceptibility of European forests, and describe the ecological processes that may explain these influences.• Overall, we find that the silvicultural operations that have the largest influence on both biotic and abiotic risks to European forest stands are closely related to species composition and the structure of the overstorey. Four main processes that drive the causal relationships between stand management and susceptibility have been identified: effect on local microclimate, provision of fuel and resources to biotic and abiotic hazards, enhancement of biological control by natural enemies and changes in individual tree physiology and development.• The review demonstrates an opportunity to develop silvicultural methods that achieve forest management objectives at the same time as minimising biotic and abiotic risks. Mots-clés :sylviculture / peuplement / occurrence / sensibilité / Résumé -Influences de la sylviculture sur le risque de dégâts biotiques et abiotiques dans les peuplements forestiers.• Cette revue bibliographique s'intéresse aux effets de la sylviculture sur la sensibilité des peuplements forestiers aux principaux agents de dégâts biotiques et abiotiques que sont les mammifères herbivores, les insectes ravageurs, les champignons pathogènes, le feu et les vents forts. * Corresponding author: herve.jactel@pierroton.inra.frArticle published by EDP Sciences Ann. For. Sci. 66 (2009) 701 H. Jactel et al.• Les pratiques forestières analysées sont la sélection et la préparation des sites de reboisement, la définition de la composition en essences et le choix du matériel génétique, les méthodes de régé-nération et d'entretien, les modalités d'éclaircie et d'élagage, le mode de récolte finale. L'influence de chacune de ces opérations sur l'occurrence des agents de dégâts biotiques et abiotiques et sur la sensibilité des peuplements est examinée ainsi que les processus écologiques sous-jacents.• Les opérations sylvicoles qui se révèlent les plus déterminantes pour la sensibilité des forêts en Europe sont celles qui affectent la composition et la structure de la strate arborée. Quatre principaux processus écologiques semblent expliquer la relation entre sylviculture et sensibilité des peuplements : la modification du micro-climat, l'apport de ressources ou de combustible aux agents de dégâts, l'amélioration du contrôle biologique par les ennemis naturels et l'altération de la physiologie et du développement des arb...

show abstract

“…Since pine weevil damage normally is more severe in clear-cuts, either larger pine weevil populations or climatic conditions may be responsible. However, resent research has shown that the density of pine weevil populations is the same in shelterwoods as in clear-cuts [15]. Furthermore, there is no correlation between climatic variables such as global radiation or soil temperature and pine weevil damage when experiments have been made close to forest edges [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of different overstory removal on planted spruce and several broadleaved tree species: Survival, growth and pine weevil damage during three years

Löf

Paulsson²,

Rydberg³

et al. 2005

Ann. For. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The influence of different overstory removal on herbivory by the pine weevil to seedlings was studied in a field experiment. Four overstory treatments with middle aged Norway spruce in combination with or without insecticide treatments were applied. Seedlings of the following seven tree species were planted in each of the four blocks: Acer platanoides L., Fagus sylvatica L., Fraxinus excelsior L., Picea abies L. (Karst.), Prunus avium L., Quercus robur L. and Tilia cordata Mill. The seedlings were monitored through the 2001-2003 growing seasons. Highest survival was found among seedlings planted in the overstory treatments with 15 and 20% light in the understory, whereas best diameter growth in seedlings was found in the clearcut. Overstory trees of Norway spruce decreased herbivory from pine weevil considerably among underplanted seedlings, and the pine weevils fed significantly more on planted Norway spruce seedlings than on all broadleaved tree species. The following rough preference order was obtained: (1) Norway spruce >> (2) beech and oak > (3) ash, cherry, lime and maple. The influence from the insecticide treatment was minor. Therefore, during the conversion of Norway spruce monocultures into mixed species stands using overstories, the use of insecticides against pine weevil is not needed.

show abstract

Pine Weevil Population Density and Damage to Coniferous Seedlings in a Regeneration Area With and Without Shelterwood

Cited by 44 publications

References 24 publications

Why vegetation increases pine weevil damage: Bridge or shelter?

Why vegetation increases pine weevil damage: Bridge or shelter?

The influences of forest stand management on biotic and abiotic risks of damage

The influence of different overstory removal on planted spruce and several broadleaved tree species: Survival, growth and pine weevil damage during three years

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About